1. Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs
2. Secretary, Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives (LGRD)

Facts

BLAST filed a writ petition challenging Section 4 of the Gram Sarkar Ain, 2003 [Village Government Act, 2003] as being inconsistent with the Constitution. Section 27 of the Act replaced the ‘Gram Parishad’ established under the স্থানীয়সরকার (গ্রামসরকার) আইন, ১৯৯৭ [Local Government (Village Government), 1997] by the ‘Gram Sarkar’. Section 4(4) laid down that the ‘Gram Sarkar’ would be composed of one Gram Sarkar Prodhan, one adviser and thirteen members in each of the wards in the union. The member of the Union Parishad of the concerned ward would be the head of the Gram Sarkar and the member from the reserved seat of the Union would be the adviser, while the remaining thirteen members would be nominated. The Gram Sarkar was envisaged to be a supportive body to the Union Parishad and not an administrative unit as defined in Article 152(1) of the Constitution.

Rule/Order/Judgment

Date: 14/07/2003

Details

The High Court issued Rule Nisi calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the Gram Sarkar Act, (2003) should not be declared as void as being inconsistent with the Constitution.

Justices

Mr. Justice A.B.M KhairulHaque
Mr. Justice Syed Shahid Ur Rahman.

Date: 02/08/2005

Details

The High Court after hearing the parties and discussing the relevant facts, constitutional provisions and the case of Kudrat-e-ElahiPanir v Bangladesh, 44 DLR (AD) 319, delivered judgment on 02.08.2005 holding that the Gram Sarkar Ain, 2003 was void. It observed that the Act had replaced the ‘Village Parishad’, an elected body and a local government by ‘Gram Sarkar’ a demonstratively autocratic body, which is inconsistent with the democratic spirit of the Constitution.

1. Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs
2. Secretary, Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives (LGRD)

Facts

BLAST filed a writ petition challenging Section 4 of the Gram Sarkar Ain, 2003 [Village Government Act, 2003] as being inconsistent with the Constitution. Section 27 of the Act replaced the ‘Gram Parishad’ established under the স্থানীয়সরকার (গ্রামসরকার) আইন, ১৯৯৭ [Local Government (Village Government), 1997] by the ‘Gram Sarkar’. Section 4(4) laid down that the ‘Gram Sarkar’ would be composed of one Gram Sarkar Prodhan, one adviser and thirteen members in each of the wards in the union. The member of the Union Parishad of the concerned ward would be the head of the Gram Sarkar and the member from the reserved seat of the Union would be the adviser, while the remaining thirteen members would be nominated. The Gram Sarkar was envisaged to be a supportive body to the Union Parishad and not an administrative unit as defined in Article 152(1) of the Constitution.

Rule/Order/Judgment

Date: 14/07/2003:

Details

The High Court issued Rule Nisi calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the Gram Sarkar Act, (2003) should not be declared as void as being inconsistent with the Constitution.

Justices

Mr. Justice A.B.M KhairulHaque,
Mr. Justice Syed Shahid Ur Rahman.

Date: 02/08/2005:

Details

The High Court after hearing the parties and discussing the relevant facts, constitutional provisions and the case of Kudrat-e-ElahiPanir v Bangladesh, 44 DLR (AD) 319, delivered judgment on 02.08.2005 holding that the Gram Sarkar Ain, 2003 was void. It observed that the Act had replaced the ‘Village Parishad’, an elected body and a local government by ‘Gram Sarkar’ a demonstratively autocratic body, which is inconsistent with the democratic spirit of the Constitution.